Obama 50%, Palin 33%

  • Thread starter Thread starter gilliam
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Personanongrata said:
A half term governor as Commander in Chief?? Seriously???
It will NEVER happen. She is just around to keep her brand in people’s faces, and them talking about her. She was not serious as governor of Alaska, she is not serious now, and will never be taken seriously by Republicans in the future.

I voted for Obama.
Click to expand...
And how’s that workin out for ya?
 
Scott_Lafrance said:
I’d rather go hunting with Palin. I’m not sure Obama would know which end of a gun is which.
Click to expand...
Somewhat related to this comment. I was listening to the radio yesterday (NPR?) and they were talking about Obama getting hammered for taking a vacation in a fancy resort town during this time of economic hardship. They mentioned that Bill Clinton had his aids run a poll of where would be the best place for him to go, and it results showed the best place would be camping in a national park. Well, he wasn’t about to do that, and didn’t. Palin would in a heart beat. 👍
 
rlg94086 said:
Sure. But, I don’t know of a lot of Americans that frequent European sites to tell them about their group-think.

Try reading William F Buckley, Jr. 🙂
Click to expand...
Or Pope Benedict XVI’s writings, or Pascal Blaise (in French) or CK Chesterton, or St Jerome…

Aaaah, so many Christians, so few Christian intellectuals. 🤷
 
rlg94086 said:
So, you are a Scandinavian liberal. Well, then, it is completely understandable that you would have little understanding of the broad spectrum of views held by American conservatives. And, it certainly explains your superior attitude.
Click to expand...
Well, if you disagree with what I said, why don’t you engage the issue instead of trying to discuss my person?
rlg94086 said:
I just love how you consider “religious” and “intellectuals” as opposites. No bias there. 😛
Click to expand...
I didn’t. I indicated that the religious right have little representation in academic circles. Do you doubt that?
rlg94086 said:
Is science by consensus what they teach in Europe? Here in the US, you actually have to prove your point. If a scientist has a theory contrary to the consensus (e.g. the world is round, not flat), they are often ridiculed by the majority. However, the truth can eventually be accepted, when the majority scientists are able to escape their strongly-held convictions and actually look at the contrary argument as a scientist.

BTW…regarding “climate change,” I’m not an expert, and I don’t take a strong view either way. The “deniers” evidence and arguments are convincing and give me enough reasonable doubt to keep me from believing we should invest billions on unproven solutions proposed by the “consensus” group-thinkers to a problem that may or may not be fixable.
Click to expand...
Of course one teaches the consensus position in science (in both the US and Europe). Find me a decent US university that doesn’t teach evolution. Both evolution and man made climate change can be called consensus positions, although evolution has a stronger consensus. There has been a concerted push-back by money-interests to discredit climate change, and it has been working. However, as a politician, you should know that scientific expertise means something. When the scientific community tell you something is real, that means that the experts tell you that something is real. If the medical community, with anything close to a similar consensus, told the politicians that a life threatening virus was about to hit us hard, it would be completely irresponsible for the politicians to ignore that based on personal opinion. It is similar in this case. You can have your personal opinion, but when the experts tell you something so serious, you need to be responsible and act upon it.

Palin, Bachmann etc. might have understood this if they where intellectual people with a field of expertise themselves. When you know a subject quite well, you realize how difficult it is to really comprehend a subject as an outsider. You realize that your intellectual or scientific horizon before you acquired expertise, was seriously lacking, and that this is the horizon of non-experts. Thus, you understand that in the fields where you lack the scientific horizon to seriously consider the issue, you make sure to be humble and take seriously the people who have acquired that horizon. That is what it means to be an educated, sophisticated, serious and responsible person. I don’t see anything close to this sophistication in Palin, Bachmann etc.
 
Persuader said:
Well, if you disagree with what I said, why don’t you engage the issue instead of trying to discuss my person?
Click to expand...
Uh huh…like you did when you accused me of “group think” and went on to inform me about the reason I hold the beliefs I do? Something like that?
 
rlg94086 said:
Uh huh…like you did when you accused me of “group think” and went on to inform me about the reason I hold the beliefs I do? Something like that?
Click to expand...
Did I not say that we are both subject to these types of biases? Also, I said this in response to your proclamation that criticism only strengthened your resolve. You do realize that this is not a good thing? When criticized by Europeans, academia and the scientific community, the right response is not increased certainty of your own positions. It should make you rethink your positions, and consider that all these smart and educated people might have a point. Seemingly, it doesn’t (strengthens your resolve instead). How is that not because of ingroup/loyalty bias?
 
bbarrick8383 said:
Speaking of Gulags, the man said during his campaign that he wanted to fund a national police force as strong as our own military…

What do you suspect he felt we needed a nationalized police force with M16A4’s, M249 SAW, tanks, stealth bombers, rocket launchers, land mines…and on and on.

Wonder what he would have called the Nationalized Police Force special force team members…

Obamaburgers???
Click to expand...
Nah, he'd call them "peacekeepers". Leftist manipulate language to sugar-coat their thirst for raw power. :rolleyes: Rob
 
Raskolnikov said:
Wanna place wager on everyone being poor in 5.5 years of Obama wins?

And my guess is the CEO of GM resigned because he wasn’t doing a very good job. I would’ve rather the state let the company go down, but a socialist would’ve appropriated the plants and put the workers in charge of everything, rather than giving give them lots ofmoney with the hope of keeping it afloat until the next election. We all know GM is on its way out, it;s only a matter of time, but if it goes out during Obama’s watch, give the historical and symbolic significance of GM to Americans. It’s a political hot potato, and what was done was probably done more for sentimental reasons than economic reasons. There’s GM, and there’re countless other major companies that went under that didn’t get bailed out because they didn’t have a name like GM.
Click to expand...
Even the left-wing Pravda organs concede that Obama fired him! And I stated clearly that not everyone suffers equally under a repressive state. The security apparatus thrives, and in the unique case of America, I'm sure that government unions will continue to make sure that they will be the last to make "sacrifices"! :ouch: Rob
 
Personanongrata said:
Dick Morris is spot on!!!

👍
Click to expand...
I too am concerned for the Palin family. But I'm far more concerned about the imminent disaster coming to our land if Americans are afraid to vote for the BEST candidate who can reform America. And that's Gov. Sarah Palin. ;) Rob
 
Persuader said:
Did I not say that we are both subject to these types of biases? Also, I said this in response to your proclamation that criticism only strengthened your resolve. You do realize that this is not a good thing? When criticized by Europeans, academia and the scientific community, the right response is not increased certainty of your own positions. It should make you rethink your positions, and consider that all these smart and educated people might have a point. Seemingly, it doesn’t (strengthens your resolve instead). How is that not because of ingroup/loyalty bias?
Click to expand...
Global warming is a good case in point. Any criticisms of it only strengthens the resolve of the in-group community, where anyone who questions it, or even questions the sweeping political, economic and social changes that are proposed as the only solution to the problem, are assumed by the global warming community to be either stupid, stubbornm or evil.
(m…uch like Sarah and Michelle are assumed to be by many of these same people)

Religious people are very familiar with this phenomena as it pertains to discussions of either the Pharoah, or God, hardening the heart of pharoah. I am not sure if these traditions are discussed much in the secular educated communities though, who have made the religious somewhat of an outgroup as of late.
 
Persuader said:
Did I not say that we are both subject to these types of biases? Also, I said this in response to your proclamation that criticism only strengthened your resolve. You do realize that this is not a good thing? When criticized by Europeans, academia and the scientific community, the right response is not increased certainty of your own positions. It should make you rethink your positions, and consider that all these smart and educated people might have a point. Seemingly, it doesn’t (strengthens your resolve instead). How is that not because of ingroup/loyalty bias?
Click to expand...
There are few groups more guiltyof “group think” and insular ideas than moderrn academia. In fact the “modern” intellectual, like his forerunners, is convinced of one thing above all else-people are too stupid to know what is best for them and need the intellectuals to make their decisions for them
 
estesbob said:
There are few groups more guiltyof “group think” and insular ideas than moderrn academia. In fact the “modern” intellectual, like his forerunners, is convinced of one thing above all else-people are too stupid to know what is best for them and need the intellectuals to make their decisions for them
Click to expand...
With the media and entertainment industries in America dominated by the liberal left, it is wll nigh impossible for even the more religious anywhere in the West to be sheltered from that influence.
On the other hand, very few people in academia, or in liberal circles in general, willhave ever even have met someone like Sarah Palin.

The ‘diversity’ of academia is literally only skin deep. True diversity of ideas is just not an aspect of the sheltered lives of that in-group.
 
estesbob said:
There are few groups more guiltyof “group think” and insular ideas than moderrn academia. In fact the “modern” intellectual, like his forerunners, is convinced of one thing above all else-people are too stupid to know what is best for them and need the intellectuals to make their decisions for them
Click to expand...
They are convinced the high IQ=common sense. It’s not the same thing.

My son is extremely high IQ, and he does the dumbest things. Like flunking out of college twice and losing all his scholarships and grants, some now have to be repaid. He makes terrible decisions about the people he hangs out with too. I’m kind of glad he’s back at home so he can absorb a little more sanity.
 
qui_est_ce said:
They are convinced the high IQ=common sense. It’s not the same thing.

My son is extremely high IQ, and he does the dumbest things. Like flunking out of college twice and losing all his scholarships and grants, some now have to be repaid. He makes terrible decisions about the people he hangs out with too. I’m kind of glad he’s back at home so he can absorb a little more sanity.
Click to expand...
Code: 
  It is extremely difficult today for ANYONE to raise responsible, moral kids. Everywhere they turn, they are told that to reach personal fulfillment, they must cast off the shackles of authority, which is only rooted in silly superstition anyway. America is now Pleasure Island! It doesn't help that even our political rulers such as Obama are constantly hinting that American institutions are screwing us. (No, it's not the GOVERNMENT killing us with their own rules, regs and taxes, NO....!) 
 Luckily, your son is not on the streets; he's with you, where you can still reach him. :o Rob
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top